Proposal: Playing with 7D on a regular basis: for or against

[Le Barron de HF]

Good morning HFers,

Another week, another poll.

The current regime has made it obvious that they will hold on to an asset as long as it may take before making a decision and won't let other GMs or outside noise (complaints) make them cave in (see ménage à trois this year).

Given that the team has a surplus of quality defensemen and will have to make important decisions in the upcoming years when some of the younger D like Mailloux, Hutson, Reinbacher, Engstrom and possibly others come knocking at the door, would it not make sense for the coaching staff to employ a line-up where 7D are used in other to increase the ability of evaluating a young D OR not hurt their value/development by preventing one from sitting out on a regular basis. Is it unorthodox? Somewhat but successful teams like TB has employed this strategy throughout the years.

In such a scenario we could see a decrease in the minutes of Savard and Matheson which would be beneficial for the latter in terms of potentially reducing brain cramps but also the former who father time may come crashing in very soon (Savard will be 34 in October).

In a configuration of 7D we could be looking at the following spread of minutes for the D:
Matheson: 21 mins (averaged 25+ last season) - Guhle 20 mins (averaged 21 mins last season; slight reduction in ice time might help in avoiding him putting himself in bad situations physically)

Harris : 16 mins (averaged 17 mins last season) - Xhekaj: 16 mins (averaged 16 mins last season)

Hutson OR Barron (waiver exempt): 15 mins - Savard: 17 mins (averaged 20 mins last season)

Struble OR Kovacevic: 15 mins(to be used in back-to-back situations)


PROS:
- In case of injuries, doesn't impact team as much.
- In case of penalties taken by defensemen (or if fights occur), doesn't leave you in a bad spot.
- Allows coaching staff a bit more room to play the players that are 'on' on that particular night or play them according to their strengths or based on style of play of opponent.
- Gives more time to evaluate some guys like Barron, Kovacevic, Harris before making a decision and having a bigger sample size. Do we want to relive some of the team's mistakes like losing Beauchemin, Hainsey and Robidas who were all long time NHLers for nothing. Defensemen take longer to develop so the more chances you give the better you increase your chances of making the right decision.
- Limit the minutes of some of the veterans who could benefit from a reduced workload not only for quality of play but also their value.
- Gives opportunity to double shift some of your best players. Dach will need to be eased in but you can give more shifts to a guy like Newhook if he's having a great night or any other player.

CONS:
- Might piss off certain players who like playing a lot of minutes.
- Does disrupt cohesion for defenseman since they may play with a different partner or see more time between their shift at times depending on role. More work for coaching staff too to make those decisions on the fly.
- If a forward gets thrown out or injured, puts team in a bit of a tougher spot.
- Limits roster flexibility for scratches (would be looking at only 1 forward as your spare forward rather than 2; not that big of a deal since team dealt with that a large portion of last season with ménage à trois)


Thoughts?

Click to read more...

 

[VirginiaMtlExpat]

Interesting. I could see it paying off, keeping them fresh and encouraging them to play more offensively.

 

[hvac412]

Good morning HFers,

Another week, another poll.

The current regime has made it obvious that they will hold on to an asset as long as it may take before making a decision and won't let other GMs or outside noise (complaints) make them cave in (see ménage à trois this year).

Given that the team has a surplus of quality defensemen and will have to make important decisions in the upcoming years when some of the younger D like Mailloux, Hutson, Reinbacher, Engstrom and possibly others come knocking at the door, would it not make sense for the coaching staff to employ a line-up where 7D are used in other to increase the ability of evaluating a young D OR not hurt their value/development by preventing one from sitting out on a regular basis. Is it unorthodox? Somewhat but successful teams like TB has employed this strategy throughout the years.

In such a scenario we could see a decrease in the minutes of Savard and Matheson which would be beneficial for the latter in terms of potentially reducing brain cramps but also the former who father time may come crashing in very soon (Savard will be 34 in October).

In a configuration of 7D we could be looking at the following spread of minutes for the D:
Matheson: 21 mins (averaged 25+ last season) - Guhle 20 mins (averaged 21 mins last season; slight reduction in ice time might help in avoiding him putting himself in bad situations physically)

Harris : 16 mins (averaged 17 mins last season) - Xhekaj: 16 mins (averaged 16 mins last season)

Hutson OR Barron (waiver exempt): 15 mins - Savard: 17 mins (averaged 20 mins last season)

Struble OR Kovacevic: 15 mins(to be used in back-to-back situations)


PROS:
- In case of injuries, doesn't impact team as much.
- In case of penalties taken by defensemen (or if fights occur), doesn't leave you in a bad spot.
- Allows coaching staff a bit more room to play the players that are 'on' on that particular night or play them according to their strengths or based on style of play of opponent.
- Gives more time to evaluate some guys like Barron, Kovacevic, Harris before making a decision and having a bigger sample size. Do we want to relive some of the team's mistakes like losing Beauchemin, Hainsey and Robidas who were all long time NHLers for nothing. Defensemen take longer to develop so the more chances you give the better you increase your chances of making the right decision.
- Limit the minutes of some of the veterans who could benefit from a reduced workload not only for quality of play but also their value.
- Gives opportunity to double shift some of your best players. Dach will need to be eased in but you can give more shifts to a guy like Newhook if he's having a great night or any other player.

CONS:
- Might piss off certain players who like playing a lot of minutes.
- Does disrupt cohesion for defenseman since they may play with a different partner or see more time between their shift at times depending on role. More work for coaching staff too to make those decisions on the fly.
- If a forward gets thrown out or injured, puts team in a bit of a tougher spot.
- Limits roster flexibility for scratches (would be looking at only 1 forward as your spare forward rather than 2; not that big of a deal since team dealt with that a large portion of last season with ménage à trois)


Thoughts?

I like it, but Carbonneau brought up a very good point that no current team in the playoffs is using their man-to-man defensive system . I don’t expect them to get rid of Robidas/Burrows but somethings gotta give both on offense and defense/ special teams.

 

[Spearmint Rhino]

I’d go with 9D if it meant never seeing a 4th line of RHP-White-Ylonen ever again

 

[Hacketts]

hard to play like a team when your team is never in synch.

 

[vokiel]

I don't mind playing games with 7Ds, but that would impact forward development if they make it regular. They can have 7Ds and do a rotation also. We have Ds who can play in the league, yes, but they're far from an elite squad. I would say the rotation might be more adequate in this case, or even moving a D to a forward position for some games. Like Xhekaj playing on the 4th line.

 

[Mrb1p]

No, trade Matheson while his value is at the highest it's going to be.

 

[Le Barron de HF]

I don't mind playing games with 7Ds, but that would impact forward development if they make it regular. They can have 7Ds and do a rotation also. We have Ds who can play in the league, yes, but they're far from an elite squad. I would say the rotation might be more adequate in this case, or even moving a D to a forward position for some games. Like Xhekaj playing on the 4th line.

It's a valid point but I'm not sure it applies in this case. I don't think anybody up front would really be affected as far as development is concerned. We'd probably be looking at a line up like this:
Slaf-Suzuki-Caufield
Newhook-Dach-Armia
Roy-Evans-Gally
Dvorak-Anderson OR RHP

I don't think it'd hurt anybody plus the double shifting element. We have a lot of guys who can take draws too.

Anyway this rotation could be thrown out by the time Savard is traded or injuries hit.

hard to play like a team when your team is never in synch.

The D squad has had the same pieces for a while so it's not like they have zero experience playing with one another.

 

[HuGo Burner Acc]

No, trade Matheson while his value is at the highest it's going to be.

I dont think they trade him this year especially since Savard will probably be traded near or at the trade deadline but Matheson could be a really nice piece in a trade for a elite forward if you add picks/prospects

 

[Mrb1p]

I dont think they trade him this year especially since Savard will probably be traded near or at the trade deadline but Matheson could be a really nice piece in a trade for a elite forward if you add picks/prospects

It would be idiotic to trade the only capable RD this team has while the team has like 7 potential NHL ready LDs. Furthermore, Savards value is nothing, it's not high anymore, he's older, he's going to be worth a 2nd at best. He's a ti-gars de chez nous, he's a fantastic role model, he's one of the smartest person in the organisation and he loves it here. Matheson is two of these things, un ti-gars de chez nous and wants to be here.

I'm sure they'll keep him, as they kept Allen for way too long (And gave him a stupid ass contract before), so I wouldn't be surprised if they gave him a contract, even.

It doesn't mean they should or that I'll be happy about it.

 

[Rapala]

Cooper seems to love going with seven D. It hasn't served him well in recent years.

 

[vokiel]

It's a valid point but I'm not sure it applies in this case. I don't think anybody up front would really be affected as far as development is concerned. We'd probably be looking at a line up like this:
Slaf-Suzuki-Caufield
Newhook-Dach-Armia
Roy-Evans-Gally
Dvorak-Anderson OR RHP

I don't think it'd hurt anybody plus the double shifting element. We have a lot of guys who can take draws too.

Anyway this rotation could be thrown out by the time Savard is traded or injuries hit.


The D squad has had the same pieces for a while so it's not like they have zero experience playing with one another.

They're not the only ones who will be competing, I'm thinking of Beck, Tuch, Florian, Heineman and maybe Mesar. They'll most likely play the majority of the season in the AHL, but if you take a roster spot on the big team away from them, then that means less chances of showing what they can do at the NHL level.

It would be better to trade away some Ds imho. If this front office can't do this, they are no better than the last one.

 

[Team_Spirit]

Shelter Hutson double shift Slaf

They will write songs about this

 

[Cournoyer12]

I don't mind playing games with 7Ds, but that would impact forward development if they make it regular. They can have 7Ds and do a rotation also. We have Ds who can play in the league, yes, but they're far from an elite squad. I would say the rotation might be more adequate in this case, or even moving a D to a forward position for some games. Like Xhekaj playing on the 4th line.

Just like Scotty used to do with Jimmy Roberts!

 

[26Mats]

Against

 

[1909]

I’d rather have a guy like Arber Xhekaj playing LW than having 7 D

 

[Habs13]

Habs tried this and it was an absolute fail. Thoroughly against. The importance of a proper 4th line is so lost on these boards. It shouldn't just be a place that spare parts meet up to play some shiney.

 

[Leon Lucius Black]

I am against 7 D, I am hoping it won't be long before we have a 4th line with an identity instead of random plugs like White, Pearson, Ylonen, Pezzeta etc. being thrown together. Being able to roll 4 lines is needed if you want to contend, one of the reasons the Habs made the finals during COVID was due to having the 4th line of Perry/Staal/Armia who helped keep the puck in the other team's end and chip in offensively.

Vegas has an ideal 4th line of Carrier - Roy - Kolesar who bring tons of physicality, create energy, are solid defensively, while also chipping in a few goals. Hopefully in a couple of years we can build a similar type of line in our bottom six with Xhekaj/Tuch.

 

[Scintillating10]

Good morning HFers,

Another week, another poll.

The current regime has made it obvious that they will hold on to an asset as long as it may take before making a decision and won't let other GMs or outside noise (complaints) make them cave in (see ménage à trois this year).

Given that the team has a surplus of quality defensemen and will have to make important decisions in the upcoming years when some of the younger D like Mailloux, Hutson, Reinbacher, Engstrom and possibly others come knocking at the door, would it not make sense for the coaching staff to employ a line-up where 7D are used in other to increase the ability of evaluating a young D OR not hurt their value/development by preventing one from sitting out on a regular basis. Is it unorthodox? Somewhat but successful teams like TB has employed this strategy throughout the years.

In such a scenario we could see a decrease in the minutes of Savard and Matheson which would be beneficial for the latter in terms of potentially reducing brain cramps but also the former who father time may come crashing in very soon (Savard will be 34 in October).

In a configuration of 7D we could be looking at the following spread of minutes for the D:
Matheson: 21 mins (averaged 25+ last season) - Guhle 20 mins (averaged 21 mins last season; slight reduction in ice time might help in avoiding him putting himself in bad situations physically)

Harris : 16 mins (averaged 17 mins last season) - Xhekaj: 16 mins (averaged 16 mins last season)

Hutson OR Barron (waiver exempt): 15 mins - Savard: 17 mins (averaged 20 mins last season)

Struble OR Kovacevic: 15 mins(to be used in back-to-back situations)


PROS:
- In case of injuries, doesn't impact team as much.
- In case of penalties taken by defensemen (or if fights occur), doesn't leave you in a bad spot.
- Allows coaching staff a bit more room to play the players that are 'on' on that particular night or play them according to their strengths or based on style of play of opponent.
- Gives more time to evaluate some guys like Barron, Kovacevic, Harris before making a decision and having a bigger sample size. Do we want to relive some of the team's mistakes like losing Beauchemin, Hainsey and Robidas who were all long time NHLers for nothing. Defensemen take longer to develop so the more chances you give the better you increase your chances of making the right decision.
- Limit the minutes of some of the veterans who could benefit from a reduced workload not only for quality of play but also their value.
- Gives opportunity to double shift some of your best players. Dach will need to be eased in but you can give more shifts to a guy like Newhook if he's having a great night or any other player.

CONS:
- Might piss off certain players who like playing a lot of minutes.
- Does disrupt cohesion for defenseman since they may play with a different partner or see more time between their shift at times depending on role. More work for coaching staff too to make those decisions on the fly.
- If a forward gets thrown out or injured, puts team in a bit of a tougher spot.
- Limits roster flexibility for scratches (would be looking at only 1 forward as your spare forward rather than 2; not that big of a deal since team dealt with that a large portion of last season with ménage à trois)


Thoughts?

Goyens was on 690 said he liked coaching a team with 7 D. Thought it helped team more than play a weak forward.

 

[Kobe Armstrong]

Has a team ever won the cup playing 7 D in the playoffs?

I wouldn't doubt it I feel like when you have a defender like MAB or Erik Gustafsson, you shelter them defensively but their offensive game is good enough you want them playing. Hutson might be that guy for us but hopefully he can take regular shifts at 5v5

 

[Le Barron de HF]

Has a team ever won the cup playing 7 D in the playoffs?

I wouldn't doubt it I feel like when you have a defender like MAB or Erik Gustafsson, you shelter them defensively but their offensive game is good enough you want them playing. Hutson might be that guy for us but hopefully he can take regular shifts at 5v5

Cooper uses 7D a lot.